From: owner-61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com (61-79-list-digest)
To: 61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Subject: 61-79-list-digest V3 #323
Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Errors-To: owner-61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk


61-79-list-digest Thursday, September 9 1999 Volume 03 : Number 323



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

FTE 61-79 - FE Duraspark
FTE 61-79 - Mounting Kits
FTE 61-79 - Speakers
Re: FTE 61-79 - Mounting Kits
FTE 61-79 - Ford 9 inch rear end questions
FTE 61-79 - OD tranny
FTE 61-79 - V8
RE: FTE 61-79 - OD tranny
FTE 61-79 - Non truck stuff
RE: FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions
RE: FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions
Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power
Re: FTE 61-79 - flooded hot restarts
Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power
FTE 61-79 - back from island paradise
FTE 61-79 - M block stuff/400 stroke
FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions
Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power
FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions
FTE 61-79 - M block dipstick
FTE 61-79 - flooded hot restarts
FTE 61-79 - Brake Bleeding -- Simple tip
RE: FTE 61-79 - Still Electrically challenged :-(
FTE 61-79 - FE Pulley Source?
FTE 61-79 - for sale 390 aluminum intake/valve covers
Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power
Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power
RE: FTE 61-79 - M block stuff/400 stroke
RE: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power
RE: FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions
FTE 61-79 - brake lines
FTE 61-79 - Gem Tank
RE: FTE 61-79 - brake lines
RE: FTE 61-79 - New to list, exhaust 101
Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford 9 inch rear end questions
RE: FTE 61-79 - Ford 9 inch rear end questions
Re: FTE 61-79 - OD tranny
FTE 61-79 - 428
Re: FTE 61-79 - flooded hot restarts
Re: FTE 61-79 - Still Electrically challenged :-(
FTE 61-79 - The Mighty Iron Beast
Re: FTE 61-79 - remind me why
Re: FTE 61-79 - flooded hot restarts
FTE 61-79 - 460 carb change
Re: FTE 61-79 - 77 E150 weird instrument panel/headers and dual exhaust
Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Pulley Source?
Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Pulley Source?
FTE 61-79 - Ford Show in Wampsville New York
FTE 61-79 - Dana 44 rear in F-100
Re: FTE 61-79 - V8

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 05:17:26 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE Duraspark

> Don't forget '75...
> FE's had D-spark in '75 and '76.

You can get a Dspark distributor for the FE at AutoZone. They don't
store stock them, they have to be ordered. Just as Steve said ask for a
'75 or '76 360 or 390 (same part number) One thing though, the core
value is nearly as high as the price of the part. You'll have to have a
Duraspark to turn in (unless you catch someone sleeping ;-). They also
have Wells modules, and we've had good luck with them, I haven't had one
returned since I've been there. (3 months)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 05:22:54 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Mounting Kits

>
> they had the y-block v8 in 63.
>
> I was looking at a Dennis Carpenter catalog earlier today and I recall them
> selling motor mounts to install windsor engines in your year truck.

There's a kit in JC Whitney that lets you install an FE and another for
a 460 in the earlier chassis, but I don't knoe about a Windsor.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 05:26:13 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Speakers

Hey Wildgirl Lisa,

What kind of speakers did you settle on for the beast(Envy?)? I'm going
to replace a set in a '75 for someone I know, and would like to get them
right the first time.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 10:42:42 GMT
From: "Gerald Ash"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Mounting Kits

Catalog Number ???
Page ???? Thanks


>From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger)
>Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
>To: Ford Truck Enthusiasts
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - Mounting Kits
>Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 05:22:54 -0500
>
> >
> > they had the y-block v8 in 63.
> >
> > I was looking at a Dennis Carpenter catalog earlier today and I recall
>them
> > selling motor mounts to install windsor engines in your year truck.
>
>There's a kit in JC Whitney that lets you install an FE and another for
>a 460 in the earlier chassis, but I don't knoe about a Windsor.
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

______________________________________________________
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 21:59:06 -0400
From: "HARLEY A PUTNAM"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ford 9 inch rear end questions

I have a 1972 F-100 with a bad rear end. I have access to a 1975 F-100, but
it has longer axles and 31 spline axles. My 72 has 28 spline axles. Will I
be able to find the 31 spline axles in the correct length, or will I have to
get the ones out of the 75 shortened if I want to use them? Also, anyone
with links to web sites that go into detail about what is possible to do to
9" ford rear ends would you please post them, so that I may learn a little
about them? If I have to go to a junk yard to get a new rear end, can
anyone give me tips on what to look for to find a positive traction unit
that will work with my 28 spline axles?

Thanks
The Dirtyman


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 08:46:08 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - OD tranny

William H. writes: >>Has anyone checked the lakewood that bolts up to the back
of the FE's ?
What tranny is that drilled for ? hmmmm...and I wonder if you could get
it drilled for a late model OD tranny

Don't all the "late model" manual shift OD trannys have integrated
bellhousings???? I was under that impression anyway...

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 08:56:46 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - V8

Someone writes: >> I have a 1963 F-250 that has a 223/4speed and I am wondering
how
> difficult it is to put a 1979 302/auto, from a van into it. I don't know
> if the 1963 model came with a V-8 option or not and if it did, will the
> 1979 motor fit into the mounts?

To the best of my memory Ford trucks have had V8 offerings since the mid 30's.
Can't remember just exactly when, but loooonnnnnggggg before '63. The optional
V8 offered in '63 would be the Y block - probably 292 Cu In. It had front
engine mounting and "ears" on each side of the bell housing for rear mounting.
If memory serves me correctly there was no crossmember under the tranny(manual)
for any type of mounting, so the tranny hung there by the four bolts holding it
to the bellhousing. You might have to fabricate stanchions for engine mounts
and make a cross member to mount the 302 and a selected auto, but anything can
be done. I really don't think this is rocket science mentality work, but would
be much easier if you were working on a naked frame (body off).
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 08:04:35 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - OD tranny

> William H. writes: >>Has anyone checked the lakewood that bolts
> up to the back
> of the FE's ?
> What tranny is that drilled for ? hmmmm...and I wonder if you
> could get
> it drilled for a late model OD tranny
>
> Don't all the "late model" manual shift OD trannys have integrated
> bellhousings???? I was under that impression anyway...
>

Nope, still separate, at least in the 'stang lineup, Lakewood makes a
bellhousing to bolt Tremecs into the new stangs that had T45's to begin with
... I don't know about the pickup lines, but since the cars are still
separate, I'd guess the trucks are too ... but like I said also, this is
just a guess.

Just my $.02
wish

96 Mustang GT 4.6L
73ish F100 4x4 6.4L
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 09:03:16 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Non truck stuff

Someone wrote: >.I don't know that I'd go that far ... supposedly (never tried
it, but Dad
claims he did) you can get them to peel out in low, then wrap them way up
and chirp as they go into drive, but I have trouble believing that straight
8 has that umph in it :) (we have a '50 4dr sedan at home)

The twin turbine was still offered up till around '57. Long after the V8's in
Buicks. The turbo 350's and turbo 400's use somewhat of the variable pitch
turbine in front of a 3 speed hydromatic for these applications. A really good
theory, just never perfected.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 08:11:50 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions

>
> 8 has that umph in it :) >>
>
> That straight 8 wasn't called the fireball for nuthin! Dont forget that
> crank was huge, so it had a lot of inertia when it was at speed,
> and during a
> shift, the inertia of the crank would overcome the friction
> between the tire
> and road, making the chirp into drive. Not necessarily due to
> horsepower,
> but the engines resistance to quick deceleration.

I would think also that the bias ply tires would have aided this ...those
suckers are skinny and not known for their "stickieness"


Just my $.02
wish

96 Mustang GT 4.6L
73ish F100 4x4 6.4L
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 09:17:59 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions

No "seem" to it, it does have more bottom end :-) (I know, you meant power)
A larger portion of every firing stroke is stored in that flywheel for later
use. Put just a 2# flywheel on a 400 2 stroke suzuki and see what it will
do in the woods :-) The old John Deer 2 cylinder "thumpers" had huge
flywheels for this reason, they only fired every few revs and the flywheels
were geared to run faster than the engine so they carried quite a bit of
punch. It's called kinetic energy (or is that potential? :-)) and it makes
a lot of difference.

The trick is to know how to use this "inertia" to the best advantage and how
to keep the energy stored for when you need it :-) (old men know all about
storing energy :-))

Punch or extrusion presses use this principle to good effect and some of
them take over an hour to shut down due to inertia stored in the flywheels.
The energy is so tremendous they don't eve put brakes on most of the larger
ones because the brake system would be expensive to maintain due to the
energy it would have to "scrub off" and you seldom turn them off once
started. You don't win drag races with this kind of technology though :-)

- --
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167
- --

> crawlers install a heavier flywheel in a vehicle. It doesn't
> add anything,
> but the extra inertia makes it seem as though the engine has
> more bottom end.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 08:22:01 -0500
From: Kevin Grabow
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power

A lot will depend on where you plan to travel with the trailer.
Yes the 300 will work, assuming 3.73 gears or lower. Just pulling
a few things once and a while with no big hills or mountains you'll
do OK, you'll be overloading the F100 though. You need to be aware
of the combined weight rating (truck and trailer) as well. My guess
is the F100 will be overloaded with a 16' utility trailer with a
small tractor (Ford 9N) or car.

Over the years I've used Fords with 302, 351, 400 and 460's to pull
various trailers with weights up to 8000lbs. I would never consider
anything less than a 351 in a 3/4 ton with at the very least 3.51
gears to pull any kind of trailer and load like you are considering.

Some experiences: 1992 Ford 302 with a 7300lb tow rating. Topped a
mountain pass just west of Missoula Mt. at 19 miles per hour with
a load of household goods (kitchen table, beds end table couch,
fridge etc. etc.) on a 5x8 utility trailer. Got rid of it.

Yesterday. 1979 F250 460. 16 foot utility trailer with solid 4' sides
and 3000lbs of sheep in it. Bucking a 25 mph head wind mostly flat
terrain. Couldn't keep up with traffic doing 65 without REALLY workin'
that motor. Maintained 55-60 with trouble. Keepin' it!

Greg Schnakenberg wrote:
>
> I had a roommate in college that had an '80 F250 with that 300. he would
> haul cattle every weekend from the local cattle auction with a 24 ft
> trailer, big ole cows are a bit heaiver than any camper, boat, or
> whatever you want to pull andhe'd get 15-17 mpg to boot!
>
> >Hello all. I am a new list subscriber. I have a question regarding my
> >'66 Ford F100 truck, and I'm hoping that someone can shed some
> >light.
> >
> >My question is about horsepower/torque and towing capacity. This
> >truck has a 300-cu.-in., straight 6 engine. It seems to have plenty
> >of power, and I've pulled a pretty heavy U-Haul trailer before that
> >was loaded with heavy things like a piano, etc.
> >
> >I want to buy a 14-ft. or 16-ft. farm/utility trailer that I can use to
> >haul a standard-sized farm tractor, or maybe a standard-sized car.
> >I would bet this truck's power is roughly equal to that of smaller V-
> >8s and would be OK, marginally perhaps, to pull a load like the one
> >I describe.
> >
> >Can anyone out there shed some light on whether this seems
> >reasonable? Could a truck like mine pull a trailer with that kind of
> >load? I can't seem to find any kind of towing capacity data,
> >horsepower, etc. for the truck on the Internet.
> >
> >Thanks in advance.
> >
> >Tim Venable
> >tim.venable conway.com
> >
> >
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 09:49:21 -0400
From: kpayne ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - flooded hot restarts

> Marty wrote:
>I just changed the 390 in my 73 F100 from a 2v over to a used Edelbrock
>600cfm with a stock cast manifold. Now when the motor is hot it seems to
>purculate (sp?) after I shut it off, it's flooded when I go to restart. Not
>too bad, but I do have to hold it to the floor and crank for a few seconds.

This sounds like a fuel pump problem. Usually, heat will
cause your carb to go dry.

>This is very frustrating and not good for the motor.

Change your oil. A flooded engine lets unburned gas get past
the rings and dilutes the oil.

>I do have a 1 inch spacer between manifold and carb, but the only one I
>could find was a solid aluminum one .

I used an additional carb gasket as an insulator. It works
real well (going on two years now with no problems). Just
make sure you put a thin layer of gasket sealer (the sticky
stuff, not silicone) between the gaskets.

Ken Payne
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 13:53:00 GMT
From: "Gerald Ash"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power

Yep, This guy is right. I have had a 300 in my F150 since it was new in
1978. It came from the factory with a 3:00 rear and a 4 speed overdrive
transmission. It was good for 80 mph on the open flat road. A boat and
trailer would hurt it bad and kill it with rolling hills. Well to make the
story short, 4:11 rear gears and now it will climb up but not run up the
hills. Everyone you see tells stories of that great 300 in line six but
when you take a peek at there Ford its with a V8. Give you a hint? Now go
ahead and put a header on your truck for power and you even get worse
pulling power then you spend that $1000.00+ with Clifford and you get a 6
that sounds like a bumble bee and will come close to sticking with a 302 2V
engine. A rule of thumb is cubic inches mean power. Go to your junk yard
and get a 1970 429/460 and have your local machine shop rebuild it, get a
pulling camshaft and slip it in with a C6 and run hard, pull hills, and
don't forget to not pass the gas station. Oh, it will also take most of the
roll out of the twin I beam as the extra weight sticks it to the road and if
you have that 4:11 rear end you can light fires on the road in cold weather.
If you don't care to outrun the State Police and want to idle, run your
air, and pull anything that want break off the back bumper then go with that
diesel, your hands might stink after each fill up but your truck will now be
a truck instead of a car with a box. Call your insurance agent and tell
him/her that you want to purchase a roll over with a diesel from them,
scatch the body off the frame and have it straightned, then put your body
onto that frame and go from there.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Gerald


>From: Kevin Grabow
>Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
>To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
>CC: 61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com
>Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power
>Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 08:22:01 -0500
>
>A lot will depend on where you plan to travel with the trailer.
>Yes the 300 will work, assuming 3.73 gears or lower. Just pulling
>a few things once and a while with no big hills or mountains you'll
>do OK, you'll be overloading the F100 though. You need to be aware
>of the combined weight rating (truck and trailer) as well. My guess
>is the F100 will be overloaded with a 16' utility trailer with a
>small tractor (Ford 9N) or car.
>
>Over the years I've used Fords with 302, 351, 400 and 460's to pull
>various trailers with weights up to 8000lbs. I would never consider
>anything less than a 351 in a 3/4 ton with at the very least 3.51
>gears to pull any kind of trailer and load like you are considering.
>
>Some experiences: 1992 Ford 302 with a 7300lb tow rating. Topped a
>mountain pass just west of Missoula Mt. at 19 miles per hour with
>a load of household goods (kitchen table, beds end table couch,
>fridge etc. etc.) on a 5x8 utility trailer. Got rid of it.
>
>Yesterday. 1979 F250 460. 16 foot utility trailer with solid 4' sides
>and 3000lbs of sheep in it. Bucking a 25 mph head wind mostly flat
>terrain. Couldn't keep up with traffic doing 65 without REALLY workin'
>that motor. Maintained 55-60 with trouble. Keepin' it!
>
>Greg Schnakenberg wrote:
> >
> > I had a roommate in college that had an '80 F250 with that 300. he
>would
> > haul cattle every weekend from the local cattle auction with a 24 ft
> > trailer, big ole cows are a bit heaiver than any camper, boat, or
> > whatever you want to pull andhe'd get 15-17 mpg to boot!
> >
> > >Hello all. I am a new list subscriber. I have a question regarding my
> > >'66 Ford F100 truck, and I'm hoping that someone can shed some
> > >light.
> > >
> > >My question is about horsepower/torque and towing capacity. This
> > >truck has a 300-cu.-in., straight 6 engine. It seems to have plenty
> > >of power, and I've pulled a pretty heavy U-Haul trailer before that
> > >was loaded with heavy things like a piano, etc.
> > >
> > >I want to buy a 14-ft. or 16-ft. farm/utility trailer that I can use to
> > >haul a standard-sized farm tractor, or maybe a standard-sized car.
> > >I would bet this truck's power is roughly equal to that of smaller V-
> > >8s and would be OK, marginally perhaps, to pull a load like the one
> > >I describe.
> > >
> > >Can anyone out there shed some light on whether this seems
> > >reasonable? Could a truck like mine pull a trailer with that kind of
> > >load? I can't seem to find any kind of towing capacity data,
> > >horsepower, etc. for the truck on the Internet.
> > >
> > >Thanks in advance.
> > >
> > >Tim Venable
> > >tim.venable conway.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

______________________________________________________
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 08:44:19 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - back from island paradise

>>Thanks again for the great deal Adam. It is so great
to be back on the list.

Welcome back, William.....to both the list and the States, but especially to
Texas :-)

- -- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 08:39:18 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - M block stuff/400 stroke

Is there any reason you couldn't just measure the throws on each crank? If
someone had a 400 crank out and someone else had a 351 crank out, looks like
we could establish some features on a particular throw to measure between
and get a quick, easy surefire method to tell them apart whether the crank
had a casting or not. It would be a good if the landmarks were accessable
while the crank was still in the engine, with only the pan off. Any takers?

- -- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 09:03:33 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions

>>The E4OD is definitely going to give
you better over all economy even over the C-6 wide ratio in most
applications but is the differnce worth all the trouble and will you be
happy with a transmission which is not as strong or reliable as the C-6?
(running for cover :-))

Don't waste your time running for cover, Gary, the ICBM on its way will take
out most of Michigan anyway. ;-)

I think I understand what yoou are saying now. The wide ratio C6 along with
bigger tires will reduce your effective final drive ratio. Plus the lower
low helps you turn those 35s from a standstill. I think I agree with you
that this is the best combo for a truck. I have seen lots of engines and
trannys burned down (up?) because the driver towed a 30' travel trailer in
OD.

- -- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:02:44 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power

Just to add a few cents of my own. My bros 84 f-150 has the 6, and it does
do wonders. We drove that thing into the mtns for camping towing a big
parachute of a trailer and still did 90+ thanks to the overdrive. I dont
care what anyone says, the 300 will do the job. Oh and yes, I do happen to
have a 460, and l wouldnt trade it for the 6, not because I dont like the
six, but because I like opening the hood and seeing nothing but engine. But
my bros 300 has done everything my 460 has, except for breaking 100 off-road.
That is somethin to try later this month :). We dont say "Keep 'em in line
with the inline" for nuthin.

Darrell Duggan
74 F-350 "Tweety"
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 08:31:25 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions

>>I don't know that I'd go that far ... supposedly (never tried it, but Dad
claims he did) you can get them to peel out in low, then wrap them way up
and chirp as they go into drive, but I have trouble believing that straight
8 has that umph in it :) (we have a '50 4dr sedan at home)

My experience was with a 55 Century Riveria. That was the two door hardtop,
small body, big V8 (for its time). Your analysis of the straight 8 is
probably accurate, but it doesn't pay to argue with dad. :-)

- -- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 08:28:02 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - M block dipstick

>>Well I'm not THE Bill you were looking for, but I'm A Bill, so I'll take a
stab at it ... I'd bet the 2wd's used a front sump pan just like the cars
do, and the 4x4's use a rear sump so they use the dipstick through the pan
trick and just plug the hole ... that's how the FE's do it, I wouldn't be
surprised to find out that all the motors worked that way ...

Thanks, Bill, any Bill, all Bills. That makes sense. I'm used to working in
education where the sensible path is not always the one taken. Oops, I think
I just let out a trade secret......

- -- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 09:09:30 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - flooded hot restarts

>>>I do have a 1 inch spacer between manifold and carb, but the only one I
>could find was a solid aluminum one .

Aluminum is a bad choice for the spacer...

But, but, the carb is aluminum........... :-)

- -- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 09:32:24 -0500
From:
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Brake Bleeding -- Simple tip

I am sure no one else has this problem, but when I bleed using the tube in can
method I almost always spill / overflow / or cant keep the tube in the fluid while
turning the valve and holding the can at the right height, so...

Last time I bled the brakes I took an old large bottle of brake fluid and drilled a
hole in the lid a hair smaller than my plastic tubing. I then added about an inch of
fluid to the bottle pushed the tube through the hole in the lid and screwed the lid
down, making sure the end of the tube was immersed in the fluid. Proceeded to
bleed the brakes and didn't spill a drop.
Bryan Kirking
66 Step Side
352 FE, 4 speed
Houston, Texas


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:12:11 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Still Electrically challenged :-(

There is a relay in the regulator which prevents feed back when the
alternator is not running. If you are getting voltage at the regulator with
the engine stopped you either have a wire hooked up wrong somewhere or this
relay is not doing it's job. A fully electronic regulator is available at
parts stores for this for about $12 and this cured my voltage leak. The one
you thought was good may not be as good as you think so don't quit before
trying a new one.

- --
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167
- --

> Anyone care to take a stab at this one?
> The Ammeter does not move during any of this!
> I don't need any more wiring diagrams, they have all been the
> same and have
> not solved the problem.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:39:27 EDT
From: BDIJXS aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE Pulley Source?

Anyone have a good source for pulleys (the whole set) for FE's?????

CJ
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 09:43:01 -0500
From: "Brian C Nyman"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - for sale 390 aluminum intake/valve covers

FYI - FE owners. Jeff is offering an intake/valve cover combo for $300. It's
nice that he's putting the offer out there, instead of just tossing it aside,
but let the "Buyer beware." A lot of times people machine these before putting
them on their old FEs. I had a chance to buy two - both had some
machining/planing done to them that made them wrong for my 390 - prior to
breaking down and getting a new one.

You can pick up an Edelbrock Performer RPM intake for an FE on-line at around
$289 + shipping, handling & tax (trust me, I've done it), all totaled around
$320. The regular Performer intake runs around $199. Even if it's the RPM
intake, you're really only throwing in the valve covers. You can pick up
"smooth" chrome valve covers for about $40 if you aren't too choosy.

Brian Nyman
bnyman allina.com

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 10:39:20 -0400
From: David Henderson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power

On 9/9/99, 9:22:01 AM, Kevin Grabow wrote
regarding Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power:


> A lot will depend on where you plan to travel with the trailer.
> Yes the 300 will work, assuming 3.73 gears or lower. Just pulling
> a few things once and a while with no big hills or mountains you'll
> do OK, you'll be overloading the F100 though. You need to be aware
> of the combined weight rating (truck and trailer) as well. My guess
> is the F100 will be overloaded with a 16' utility trailer with a
> small tractor (Ford 9N) or car.

I've been a lot more impressed with the 300 I6 than with the 351W.
Pound for pound, the 300 is more powerful and efficient. More than
once, I've seen a 300 outpull a big Windsor, whether it was calves,
range maggots (sheep), or grain. Why do you think they put the 300 in
grain wagons, but didn't do the same for the Windsors?

As an example, the donor 300 in Brownie came out of an E-350. The
owner has an air conditioning repair service and used his van to haul
his tools in the van and pull new or old units on a trailer behind the
van. With the 300 in the van, he could pull Brush Mountain on US Hwy
460 (about a 1700 foot incline over about 2 miles, no switchbacks,
just straight up) fully loaded and reach the top doing 50mph. He was
not happy with this performance and swapped the 300 for a 351W. After
the swap, he could pull the same mountain, loaded equivalently, doing
about 40mph at the top. He told me several times that he wished he
had never swapped out the 300 for the big Windsor. You're probably
asking why didn't he put the 300 back in, because he solved the
problem by putting in a 6.9L diesel (I agree with Gerald Ash there).

> Some experiences: 1992 Ford 302 with a 7300lb tow rating. Topped a
> mountain pass just west of Missoula Mt. at 19 miles per hour with
> a load of household goods (kitchen table, beds end table couch,
> fridge etc. etc.) on a 5x8 utility trailer. Got rid of it.

Is this really a good comparison. I've seen the old F100s pull and
haul (without squatting) more than the new F150s. I'm a firm believer
that they really do not build trucks like they used to (with the
possible exception of the new super duties) and really stopped
building light duty half tons in 1979 (and no, I'm only about 30).

> Over the years I've used Fords with 302, 351, 400 and 460's to pull
> various trailers with weights up to 8000lbs. I would never consider
> anything less than a 351 in a 3/4 ton with at the very least 3.51
> gears to pull any kind of trailer and load like you are considering.

See point number one.

Yes, I do believe that he more than likely would be taxing the limits
of the F100, but if he is going to pull this load once in a Blue Moon,
the truck should stand up to the abuse. Another options would be to
swap the rear axle for a Dana 60 from the bone yards with a lower gear
ratio.

On 9/9/99, 9:53:00 AM, Gerald Ash wrote
regarding Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power:

> Yep, This guy is right. I have had a 300 in my F150 since it was new
> in 1978. It came from the factory with a 3:00 rear and a 4 speed
> overdrive transmission. It was good for 80 mph on the open flat road. A boat
> and trailer would hurt it bad and kill it with rolling hills. Well to
> make the story short, 4:11 rear gears and now it will climb up but not run up
> the hills. Everyone you see tells stories of that great 300 in line six
> but when you take a peek at there Ford its with a V8. Give you a hint?
> Now go ahead and put a header on your truck for power and you even get worse
> pulling power then you spend that $1000.00+ with Clifford and you get
> a 6 that sounds like a bumble bee and will come close to sticking with a
> 302 2V engine. A rule of thumb is cubic inches mean power.

Yes, the headers will give you more power than the stock manifolds
(think the FEs were restrictive, consider six cylinders emptying into
a long single tube with only one exit), but for pulling, you want more
torque. That 302 V-8 is only two (2) more cubic inches (actually
smaller than my 306 cid I6 after the rebuild) than a stock 300. the
stroke for the 302 is 3 inches and the stroke for the 300 is 4 inches.
Stroke is where you get your torque from. I'll give you that the 302
will perform better a high rpms unloaded (more horsepower), but it
will not outpull a 300, especially when equipped equivalently (2v carb
and at least split exhaust manifolds. Tony M should be able to tell
you from where or off of what you can get them.).

And yes, my F-250 4x4 still has a 300 in it and no, it does not sound
like a bumble-bee or even a herd of mosquitos. From Greg's first
message, it did not sound like he was unhappy with the performance of
the 300 in his F-100, but concerned about the limitations of his
truck.

Just some stuff to consider and a little ranting and raving. Thanks
for your patience!!

Dave H

PS If you think about it, the 300 I6 has the same dimensions as the
400, minus two cylinders. 4 inch bore and 4 inch stroke.

- --
_
_| ~~. David Henderson
\, _} DHenders VT.Edu
\( Gig 'em Aggies! '93

Currently at:
Interdepartmental Genetics Program
2010 Litton Reaves Hall
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Blacksburg, VA 24061
(540)231-4773
(540)231-5014
DHenders VT.Edu
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dasc.vt.edu/henderson/dhenderson.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:58:07 -0400
From: "Ray Taschenberger"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power

RE: I-6.
Y'All boys who've been around awhile and know anything about heavy duty off
road pullin'; I am talking work, now not play, would know that the I-6 has
been the engine of choice for years. The I-6 will get down to a pull and
stay there; like in logging and farming. A lot of the examples given here
will support that. fwiw,
ray

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 11:21:42 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - M block stuff/400 stroke

OX's method was probably the best way to do it with the pan off but since
there were no arcane crank dimensions for these engines you have exactly two
choices, either exactly 4" or exactly 3.5" so it's really a no brainer. If
your efforts, what ever they may be, net you somewhere near 4" it's a 400
and if it appears to be closer to 3.5" then it's a 351. Simple eh?

FE's and 460/429's are a little harder so you have to be more careful but
the 335 series can be measured with your eyes closed :-) You have to really
try to fail to recognize .5" difference in the stroke :-)

- --
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167
- --

> Is there any reason you couldn't just measure the throws on
> each crank? If
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 11:23:32 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power

So will a 460 with a spread bore carb :-)

- --
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167
- --

> been the engine of choice for years. The I-6 will get down to
> a pull and
> stay there;
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 08:56:24 -0700
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - overdrive questions


> Well, I'm a little confused here. Overdrive reduces engine rpm at highway
> speeds, but has absolutely no effect at start up or any speed under about
> 40
> mph, depending on whether you are going uphill or downhill.
True
> Bigger tires also reduce engine speed, but at all ranges because the tires
> are a constant
> size (duh).
Also true.
> The wide ratio C6 has a lower first gear than prior C6s to
> compensate for the lower ratio rearends installed in an effort to increase
> gas mileage.
This statement is what everyone is getting at. Using the wide ratio
with a lower rear gear to lower hwy cruise rpm.
> Anyone ever drive a Buick twin turbine DynaFlow? They don't
> shift. Performance off the line in Drive stinks. Shift into Low and the
> picture changes to a tire squalling monster. My contention is that a wide
> ratio C6 is the transmission of choice, but because of better start the
> truck rolling performance. The 1:1 final ratio will not produce any
> benefit
> over any other automatic.
>
True again. The final ratio in both gearsets is 1:1. Overall change in
cruise rpm: zero. But paired with a lower numerical rear end it will reduce
the overall final drive ratio. For example (assuming that Ox was correct
with the ratios) comparing a wide ratio with a 2.75 rear to a standard gear
set using a 3.00 rear gear:

Standard C-6
Gear Ratio Rear Gear Final
1 2.46 3.00 7.38
2 1.46 3.00 4.38
3 1.0 3.00 3.00

Wide Ratio
Gear Ratio Rear Final Change
1 2.72 2.75 7.48 1%
2 1.54 2.75 4.24 3%
3 1.0 2.75 2.75 9%

So going from a standard C-6 with a 3.00 gear to a Wide Ratio with a 2.75
would give relatively the same first two final gear ratios and a lower
numerical final ratio. Equivalent to a .91 overdrive compared to the
original setup.

Tom H
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 11:18:17 -0500
From: "Brett Yerks"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - brake lines

I'm going to replace the rubber front brake lines in my truck, 76 F250. I'd
like to get longer ones and I'm wondering if anyone else has done the same
thing by just using brake lines from another vehicle. If not I'll probably
end up giving Superlift a call.

Thanks,
Brett
76 F250
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.superford.org/fbird


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 10:34:59 -0600
From: William Whited
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Gem Tank

Does anyone know how a Gem Tank works? The truck I just got has the Gem
Tank on it, has the switch and if you turn the switch to the front tank
(which is bone dry now) nothing happens, it continues to run off of the
rear tank. Any help info or direction for info like instructions a
company number or site would be greatly appreicated.

William A Whited
74 F100 Ranger Supercab 390
77 F150 Custom 460

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 13:10:44 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - brake lines

You may be able to do this but the stock lines have a rectangular surface
with a shoulder to maintain their position and prevent the banjo bolt from
loosening. Any replacement should have some means to do this too but I used
Cepek, Superlift lines in the rear and front axle and Earl's for the wheels
up front with round banjo heads on them and so far they are staying in
place. This may be one reason they are not dot approved but you can use
safety wire to secure the banjo bolt if necessary.

- --
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167
- --

> I'm going to replace the rubber front brake lines in my
> truck, 76 F250. I'd
> like to get longer ones and I'm wondering if anyone else has
> done the same
> thing by just using brake lines from another vehicle. If not
> I'll probably
> end up giving Superlift a call.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 12:56:02 -0500
From: Dave Jacobs
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - New to list, exhaust 101

I'm bringing the '78 to a custom exhaust shop on Monday. Looking at a 2-1
flowmaster-type 2 or 3 chamber install. The aluminized pipe options are
2.25" or 2.50" and a 3" tailpipe. Any suggestions which pipe size is best
for a 460 (from '75 Lincoln) and if a 2 chamber will be too loud? Thanks.
Dave.

-----Original Message-----
From: Peters, Gary (G.R.) [mailto:gpeters3 visteon.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 1999 9:58 AM
To: '61-79-list ford-trucks.com'
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - New to list, exhaust 101

Here's my take on this.....two into one is the easiest,
efficient way to go.
You already have the truck exhaust so you are most of the
way home. Headers
on 4x4's are a pain unless you get the over the frame,
outside the frame
style, they are expensive and, unless you have done
extensive work on the
engine will dissappoint you with the results. My stock 460
actually ran
better with the Walker 2 into 1 system than with the headers
and that was on
a 2wd with straight pipes and no interferance. As you say,
great at the
bottom but nothing on top. With headers, 2.75 gears and
wide ratio C-6, it
chokes at about 75 in second and I have to let off the gas
to force a shift
which is really irritating when passing 10
cars........Ooooops....Passing
traffic in the rain :-) (only did that twice, don't do it
anymore...:-))

--
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167
--

> I have truck exhaust manifolds and they're connected via
9"
> of 460 exhaust
> pipe from the flange down, welded to existing 400M exhaust
pipe. Have
> incredible power in the low range and accelerating to
highway
> speed, but
> after not much.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 12:07:02 -0700
From: "Danger"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford 9 inch rear end questions

> I have a 1972 F-100 with a bad rear end...
> ... If I have to go to a junk yard to get a new rear end, can
> anyone give me tips on what to look for to find a positive traction unit
> that will work with my 28 spline axles?
>
> Thanks
> The Dirtyman
..........

If the axle code found on the drivers side door begins with a letter
rather than a number, then it might be what you are looking for. If both
rear wheels rotate in the same direction with the vehicle raised off the
ground then it is not a standard differential. Page #170 of the Haynes
repair manual for 1973-1979 (or page #325 in Chilton 1965-86) shows 3 types
of differentials. The "Model 70 with 2 piece case with limited slip" seems
to be what you are looking for. I've got something similar in my 69 F250 and
my neighbor has a similar one in his 65 F100 (Dana #60-2). It seems like in
order to find a 28 spline count you'll need to look at vehicles of the same
year as yours, or older vehicles. I suggest you visually inspect the
differential by removing the cover plate and verifying that it really is
what you want and it isn't damaged before you buy it.

Danger
danger csolutions.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.csolutions.net/myth


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 13:13:53 -0500
From: Dave Jacobs
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Ford 9 inch rear end questions

Also, early Broncos carry 28 spline axle-shafts, and I believe the housing
is the same length. I have a LS 3-series carrier in MN if your interested.

-----Original Message-----
From: Danger [mailto:danger csolutions.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 1999 2:07 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford 9 inch rear end
questions

> I have a 1972 F-100 with a bad rear end...
> ... If I have to go to a junk yard to get a new rear end,
can
> anyone give me tips on what to look for to find a positive
traction unit
> that will work with my 28 spline axles?
>
> Thanks
> The Dirtyman
..........

If the axle code found on the drivers side door begins
with a letter
rather than a number, then it might be what you are looking
for. If both
rear wheels rotate in the same direction with the vehicle
raised off the
ground then it is not a standard differential. Page #170 of
the Haynes
repair manual for 1973-1979 (or page #325 in Chilton
1965-86) shows 3 types
of differentials. The "Model 70 with 2 piece case with
limited slip" seems
to be what you are looking for. I've got something similar
in my 69 F250 and
my neighbor has a similar one in his 65 F100 (Dana #60-2).
It seems like in
order to find a 28 spline count you'll need to look at
vehicles of the same
year as yours, or older vehicles. I suggest you visually
inspect the
differential by removing the cover plate and verifying that
it really is
what you want and it isn't damaged before you buy it.

Danger
danger csolutions.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.csolutions.net/myth


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 12:21:02 -0700
From: "Danger"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - OD tranny

> > William H. writes: >>Has anyone checked the lakewood that bolts
> > up to the back
> > of the FE's ?
> > What tranny is that drilled for ? hmmmm...and I wonder if you
> > could get
> > it drilled for a late model OD tranny
..........

The lakewood for FE's had two different bolt patterns pre-drilled into
it. Since I never bolted it up to anything, I can't tell you what it mates
to.


Danger


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 16:03:26 -0500
From: Dave Jacobs
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 428

A guy has a rebuilt 428 in a '70 F250 for sale. I'm interested in the rear
axle and 4 spd behind the engine. Am interested in knowing if it will be
easy to get rid of the 428? The F250 has no title and since it's in
Minnesota, most likely is rusted out. Thanks.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 14:45:08 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - flooded hot restarts

>>>>I do have a 1 inch spacer between manifold and carb, but the only one I
>>could find was a solid aluminum one .

>> Aluminum is a bad choice for the spacer...

>But, but, the carb is aluminum........... :-)
>
>-- John

Yep, the carb is aluminum. And so is my intake manifold.
And when you shut off the hot motor, all that manifold heat
just percolates the fuel right out of that aluminum carb and
sends it down the manifold... I would have to crank it for
quite a while to start it and then it would be rough and spew
black smoke for a bit until it cleared up.
The first "insulating" spacer I tried was a kit that came with
4 1/16" thick aluminum plates and 5 gaskets. You alternate
gasket/plate/gasket/plate/gasket and it makes a stack about 1/2"
thick that's supposed to be a carb insultor. I didn't think it
worked worth beans and I finally ditched it in favor of a 1" plastic
spacer. That worked very well and almost fully cured my hot start
problems. A fuel pressure regulator set to 5-6psi finished the cure.
Insulating spacers shouldn't be to hard to find. I've even seen
homemade ones whittled out of a 1" thick wood plank and varnished
to seal them...

Steve
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 14:45:09 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Still Electrically challenged :-(

>So go looking. Rig up a temp wiring harness that allows quick disconnects,
>get paper and pen. List config. Check each circuit one at a time.
>Quadtripple check the wires, Yep it's wired like Ford, Hayens, Chilton, and
>everyone I can think of and, there is a draw through the regulator, I'm
>going to have a dead battery over night!
>Take a deep breath...
>That's it, now be calm...
>Disconnect the Regulator.
>Calmly close the hood and put the tools away.
>Come in here and tell you all about it!

Sooo, with the reg hooked up and key off, what voltages do you
find on the reg terminals?

You said that "I" isnt't hooked up right? You gotta ammeter, right?
Shouldn't be any volts at "I".

Terminal "A+" is connected to the battery, so there definately
should be 12v there...

Terminal "S" goes to the alternator stator. There shouldn't be any
voltage here with motor not running. If you find a voltage at this
terminal, you may have one or more bad alternator diodes.
(or something miswired...)
Bad diodes could be verified by disconnecting the black/yellow wire
(from battery to alt output). If this makes the voltage at reg
terminal "S" go away, then you've got bad alternator innerds.

Terminal "F" goes to the alternator field. There shouldn't be any
voltage here with key off. Any voltage here indicates a bad
regulator or a miswire.

There shouldn't be any voltage at the "S" or "F" terminals on
the back of the alternator. These are connected to the "S" and "F"
terminals at the reg, but double check them anyway incase it's
not wired correctly.

Can you measure the leakage current draw with an ammeter? I'd be
curious to know how many amps it's sucking down, that might give
a clue as to what's doing it...

>I have this 108 AMP GM alternator in the shop on a shelf...
>I just informed the truck that I have done it in the past, and would again!

AAHRRGGHH! PHHHTT!! GACKK! GM PARTS! RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY!!!

Steve
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 15:08:23 -0700
From: Brett Withers
Subject: FTE 61-79 - The Mighty Iron Beast

Brother Ballinger people used to make fun of my big ole' 352 till I'd unwind
it in second gear. Of course most of them were driving ch*%$#'s. Everyone
would say that thing won't turn more than 4500 rpm. Well I now I twisted it
to 6000 regularly and this was the stock 352 P.I. with 200,000 miles on it.
A friend raced a 65 f-100 352 with a tri-power intake that would be turning
7000 plus when it went thru the lights for a 6.21 1/8th mile. Not bad for a
truck that we drove to and from the track and weighed 4500 lbs.

I believe!! I have seen the light!! And will spread the word to one and
all who dare challenge the Iron Beast.

RBW
65 F-100 352 police interceptor
74 Bronco 302
78 Bronco 351


they've never put one together. They
>are just pushing some new aftermarket part someone has come
up with to
>"prop up" the "weaknesses" of this design. Now come on
guys repeat
>after me... I WILL FOREVER DEFEND THE HONOR OF THE MIGHTY
IRON BEAST...I
>WILL FOREVER DEFEND...

Amen Brother Ballinger!!!!! Preach on!!!!!
Stu
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 18:32:43 EDT
From: IanBoss69 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - remind me why

In a message dated 9/3/99 6:59:31 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
gpeters3 visteon.com writes:

> Remove part of the manifold????!!! Ok, you're putting headers on right?


Exhaust Manifold

Ian
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 18:08:04 -0500
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - flooded hot restarts

Check out some of the fastest Pro-Stock drag cars in the NHRA. They run
plywood carb spacers.

Jason


I've even seen
> homemade ones whittled out of a 1" thick wood plank and varnished
> to seal them...
>
> Steve
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 16:54:56 -0700
From: ROD ROBERTSON
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 460 carb change

I just got my Edelbrock carb and manifold I ordered from Jegs for My
460. Took the
old manifold off and cleaned things up, but haven't put anything on yet.
Need to get
some new manifold bolts so it will all look "purdy". If the carb is a
Carter design
then it is a "Heinz 57" of carbs, cuz its got Weber USA stamped all over
it!
They also sold me the throttle lever adapter #1483 which looks right for
the
kickdown and they sold me a #1495; throttle cable plate kit which I
don't think I
need since I brought over the same goofy throttle rod setup from the
360. Hope to
have all this running this weekend!

Rod
1970 F250 Camper special 460



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 17:45:40 -0700
From: "James A. Doty"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 77 E150 weird instrument panel/headers and dual exhaust

Hi there:

What size engine?

I have ceramic coated Dynomax headers on my '78 E-150 w/351W.

James A. Doty
dotyj earthlink.net

>Another unrelated question:
>I'm going to need to replace the exhaust soon. I can buy pre-made pipe
>(single exhaust) front to back for about $135. The truck has no converters
>(gotta love that GVW!). Does anyone still make headers for this truck and
>would it be smog legal in CA, since I have no converters? If headers are a
>no-no, what about running dual exhaust all the way back off the stock
>manifolds? Is that legal? Any advice?
>
=========================
James A. Doty
Technology Aide
Woodland School District
dotyj earthlink.net
www.moselle.com/~jamesd
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 21:11:04 -0400
From: "Ted and Sarah Freeman"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Pulley Source?

CJ,

I think a company called March sells them. I had a catalog from them a
couple of months ago and saw them listed. Don't know how to get in touch
with them though. Sorry....

- -Ted
- -----Original Message-----
From: BDIJXS aol.com
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Thursday, September 09, 1999 10:41 AM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE Pulley Source?


>Anyone have a good source for pulleys (the whole set) for FE's?????
>
>CJ
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 18:30:07 -0700
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Pulley Source?

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.marchperf.com/ford.html#390

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets"

- -----Original Message-----
From: BDIJXS aol.com
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Thursday, September 09, 1999 7:42 AM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE Pulley Source?


>Anyone have a good source for pulleys (the whole set) for FE's?????
>



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------....


To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.